Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why?
Who are these users who want/could make effective use of sandbox, but need none of the other features of pro, exactly?
What an odd response.
Windows Sandbox
321–328 of 328 posts
Re: Windows Sandbox
#322Seems like a really nice feature. I've been thinking about something like this for a while. I see some people are really annoyed that it isn't available for the Home version and I too am somewhat annoyed but in this case it is somewhat understandable since it depends on a feature that is (somewhat more reasonable) limited to Pro versions. The thing that annoys me more (hi MS guys, feel free to tell the relevant peopl…
> they have started to add ads to the login screen and my start menu A coworker has asked what reasons I could have for not wanting to run "the best OS". this is enough for me.
If your coworker thinks that any version of Windows is "the best OS", then said coworker needs lobotomized (or might already be lobotomized).
LTSB is (IMO) the best version of Windows since 2000, but it still ain't good enough to be my daily driver.
Re: Windows Sandbox
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
I digress. With the exception of biological disease there has never been a problem that more money couldn't solve. Whoever believes otherwise simply doesn't have enough money (or doesn't want to spend enough money) to accomplish what they're trying to do. Especially with computers. Take a car wreck
How much money would it take to make volcanoes stop existing?
Technically it's free, if you wait long enough. If you wanted to be free of their influence then enough money to relocate into space or another planet without volcanoes. If you wanted to get rid of volcanoes on Earth then your best chances would likely be to try and slow the rotation of the Earth by sapping angular momentum, expensive and slow but it should work I think!
Re: Windows Sandbox
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they have started to add ads to the login screen and my start menu A coworker has asked what reasons I could have for not wanting to run "the best OS". this is enough for me.
What was your reason before ads were added to Windows?
Mine:
- Clumsy installation process (unless you where in a position where you didn't have to rely on OEM crap, i.e. unless you where an IT pro or enthusiast)
- Performance. My builds would easily take 50% more time on the same hardware with Windows. Git was slower. Node was slower.
- Ecosystem. Until WSL getting access to standard tooling was kind of clumsy (respect for Cygwin, but still). Even after WSL it is still clumsy (who can tell my how to activate WSL without consulting duckduckgo? I've done it twice and I still cannot say for sure).
- Package management: Used to be non-existent (except again cygwin). Now it is just clumsy (a mix of Windows Store, WSL apt-get and Chocolatey should get you most of the stuff you need.)
- Licensing. I'm no die hard free software person, but many of the standard programs on Windows are directly user hostile (Acrobat Reader comes to mind).
- Until recently Windows also lacked basic desktop manager features like multiple desktops.
- Not directly Microsofts fault, but if people like me are using Windows it is often because someone I work for demand it. Usually that also means having to deal with an IT department running Active Directory and all the "interesting" consequences that has, even for someone who is part of said IT department like I've been. (Getting locked out from your files because an admin flipped a switch? Check! Someone swapped regional settings across a group of machines that I was responsible for and locked them, causing all POS systems to fail with no way to fix them? Check! Having to wait for all kinds of scripts that run on logon? Check! Accept having basic parts of your user experience set by it department? Check! Again this is not MS fault directly but back when I first experienced working with Windows in companies for some reason Active Directory seemed to attract people who wants to to those kinds of things and/or it has a power to make them want it.
Re: Windows Sandbox
#325Did Microsoft fix the issue that when Windows virtualization is enabled then VirtualBox VMs do not run [0]? Better they focus some of their resources to fix that first. If not yet, then Windows Sandbox it is a less useful feature that it may seem, because we have to choose between Windows Virtualization and VirtualBox VM snapshots all the time. [0] https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/16801
Yes, it was fixed last week in VirtualBox 6.0, which now uses Hyper-V APIs at the cost of reduced performance.
Re: Windows Sandbox
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same goes for full disk encryption, it isn’t included in the cheapest edition I installed on an old laptop for my mother. Now booting with veracrypt takes 2 minutes. Needless to say I had to get her a chromebook: new laptop, easy to use, secure and for the price of one windows license. This is what will get Microsoft in the end.
I question your mother's need for full disk encryption.
Everybody needs disk encryption. Loose your laptop on the train or in a cafe and all your browser cookies are out in the wild.
That's just the start, people store private stuff on their computers you know. Photos, letters, bank transactions, emails, contact lists.
Microsoft choice to make this not only non-default but even a premium feature is inexcusable. I already switched to Ubuntu for this reason alone. Now my life is much easier for many other reasons as well, like Docker.
Re: Windows Sandbox
#327I wish they would have added the option to have the data persist. I have a bunch of software that I run only a few times per year, but I don't want to go through the hassle of re-installing it every time I need to run it. It would have been so much more useful if the data could persist.
Wouldn't that make it an ordinary VM?
Ordinary VM takes several GB of storage to store the whole guest OS. A docker image is only as big as the delta inside it and you can easily persist data outside of it with docker volumes.
Re: Windows Sandbox
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Being just the start, MSI packages may very well be supported for at least a few more years on Windows 10. However, by looking on the GitHub repo of MSIX, there are some hints that Microsoft envisions a future where MSIX not only replaces the MSI but also creates a package format which cross-platform Microsoft applications can recognize and use on any platform (iOS, Android, MacOS, and Linux)." https://www.advancedi…
> MSI packages may very well be supported for at least a few more years on Windows 10 This sounds like someone making installer stuff would say. MSI will be supported on modern OSes for much longer than "a few more years". VB6 apps created in 1998 will be supported until 2025 at least. MSIs will be treated the same.
Windows Core OS doesn't support MSI by default. :)